Here's what's going on... (Updated)

Everyone's trying to log onto No Quarter right now, in order to learn about the alleged "Whitey" video.

I finally got onto the site. Larry still has not proven the existence of the thing. His list of sources is up to five. No word on the TV network rumor. But we do have a description of the visual element:

It features Michelle Obama and Louis Farrakhan. They are sitting on a panel at Jeremiah Wright’s Church when Michelle makes her intemperate remarks. Whoops!! When that image comes out it will enter the politcal ads hall of fame.

Any photos of Michelle and Farrakhan together will suffice to end Democratic chances in November, even if the two were just trading recipes for sweet potato pie.

(Oh, don't accuse me of stereotyping. I happen to like sweet potato pie.)

Update: This odd site claims to have a transcript, based on an email of uncertain origin. Not exactly a convincing provenance, is it? For what (little) it may be worth, here 'tis:

“Once again, the white man keeps us down, what’s up with Whitey, Why’d he attack Iraq, Why’d he let Katrina happen, Why’d he leave millions of children behind. This is the legacy the white man gives us”

I have a container of Morton's on the desk, which I keep for just such occasions.

Regarding party unity, Anglachel found just the right words:

All around Left Blogistan, Obamacans are reveling in the seeming victory of the RBC ruling and are disdainfully telling Hillary and her supporters that they need to fall in line, get with the program, and otherwise show that we're worthy of being part of Whole Foods Nation. Ezra Klein pompously warns Hillary: "[There is an] authentic, deep anger among Clinton supporters. And that's not a problem the Rules Committee can resolve. This one is up to Clinton herself."

Erm, no.

The deep problem of Obama's campaign is that he and his supporters do not want to face the political reality of their own conflicting desires. They both want to sweep to victory in November and they want to purge the party of anything connected to the Clintons, which includes all of the voting contituencies represented by that amazing and talented duo. The failure of the Unity Pony stems directly from that fantasy of majority status without majority support and the political work and compromises that go with cultivating that support. Thus, their model for unity is unanimity through elimination, purging the ranks of the unclean and unbelievers.

They will not acknowledge that Hillary is a legitimate political actor and reduce her to an inhuman monster and enemy. They will not acknowledge that her supporters have sound, rational reasons for our support, and reduce us to mindless fools and spoils of war. They shift blame for their own choices and actions onto us and expect that we will cater to their whims.

Carrying the theme forward, Big Tent Democrat says:

I am amazed at the view expressed by Obama supporters that unifying the Democratic Party is a problem for Hillary Clinton. Like me, they all expect Barack Obama to be the nominee, but they insist that the problem of unifying the Democratic Party belongs to Hillary Clinton. This is an incredibly obtuse view. Obama is going to be the candidate who will win or lose in November. It will be HIS job to unify the Party. Ezra Klein does not see it that way:

[There is an] authentic, deep anger among Clinton supporters. And that's not a problem the Rules Committee can resolve. This one is up to Clinton herself.

Um no. That is up to the likely nominee, Barack Obama.

It's too late. Too late. The Obots know only how to attack and to insult, and they seem genuinely stunned when all of this energetic attacking and insulting steels our determination to go our own way. We really don't care about sitting at the Cool Kids' Table. Spit on our faces does not provoke a deep longing to unite. Obots seem to think that brandishing a knife while screeching for blood is a form of seduction. In my experience, that approach never works, outside of one or two goth clubs in Hollywood.

Powerline has a hilarious compendium of zealous reactions to Obama's long-ago Great Speech on Race, the one he delivered when the first Wright controversy flared up. At the time, lots of folks hated me because -- contrary to the Party Line -- I said that Obama (or "Slowbama") spoke poorly and unpersuasively. The Party Liners now seem awfully stupid.

Perhaps the silliest Party Liner was Andrew Sullivan. His gushing man-crush reaction was purpler than Pilate's toga:

This is what my faith is about. It is what the Gospels are about. This is a candidate who does not merely speak as a Christian. He acts like a Christian.

(Emphasis added.) If you are the sort of grammarian who still insists on recognizing the distinction between "as" and "like," then you'll giggle at Sullivan's implication. You can't act like a Christian if you are one. Thus: Christianity is the best image.